An alumna of Clarion West Writer’s Workshop for science fiction and fantasy, I’ve written for markets like The New York Times and Time Out New York. Currently, I write about sci-fi for Blastr. I also edit the humor competition for The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction. You can follow me on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and here at Forbes.

Although I enjoyed the film The Hunger Games, I have a friend who hated it so much that it made him “want to gnaw both my legs off.” The movie left him with more questions than it answered—questions that I didn’t have, because I had read the novel by Suzanne Collins first. (For the record, I prefer the novel.)

Then I wondered, how many others were similarly confused? So I took my friend’s questions and answered them. I’m sharing them with you, below. In fact, if you have other questions, please let me know. I have the book right here.

I do agree that many of these questions could have been eliminated with one line of dialog at the right moment—a victim of a plot tightened too much for action, perhaps. (It will be interesting to see if there are any deleted scenes that fill in some of these answers when the film arrives on DVD.)

Why were the tributes working together when the object of the Hunger Games is to kill everyone?

Districts 1, 2, and 4 have “career tributes,” known as “Careers.” They’re trained their entire lives to fight in the Hunger Games, and for them, it’s an honor to be picked. The Careers naturally band together, even in the cafeteria before the games begin.

Why did they let Peeta join their pack?

The Careers were jealous that Katniss scored an 11 in her pre-game rating—the highest of all the tributes. They let Peeta live because they believe he has information to help them get to her.

Why does Katniss blow up the food supply?

At this point in the movie, Katniss has allied herself with Rue. With Katniss’ hunting skills and Rue’s ability to tell which plants are edible, they can feed themselves. The Careers, who’ve spent their lives training for fighting rather than survival, can’t. By taking away their food, Katniss is taking away their ability to sustain themselves.

Why weren’t the sponsors, actually, ya know, sponsoring?

Katniss’ mentor, Haymitch, recruited sponsors for her, and their gift of burn cream likely saved her leg. But when the gifts arrived, they came with a note from Haymitch, not from the actual sponsors. You would think that if you were spending money on a life-saving gift, in a show that was watched by all 12 districts, you would want your name emblazoned on the cannister for all to see.

So, yeah, it’s true we didn’t see sponsors in the movie, but we don’t really see them in the book either. I imagine the sponsors were shown in the commercial breaks in the actual footage.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

John, I think perhaps you are being deliberately obtuse, trying to find reasons to dislike the film. Katniss doesn’t WANT to kill people. She is not a “Career.” She wants to SURVIVE. “Stay alive.” She’s hoping they take each other out, leaving her with the least amount of killing. The only reason she shot the two people she did was 1) defense and 2) mercy. She is NOT an action hero. She’s a lost teenage girl, disgusted by the world of the adults around her; just trying to survive. THAT’S what is so appealing to the kids, especially the female ones. I think that feeling – confusion, disgust, fear, mixed with bravery & the will to survive – was pulled off extraordinarily by Jennifer Lawrence.

She’s not an action hero – and yet she is brave beyond words, in spite of her fear and loathing in the situation she’s been force into. I think that’s pretty clear in the film performance. She’s someone all girls can aspire to be – not perfect, but brave & self-sustaining.

Katniss CAN make her own bow, but she would have to have the correct supplies…AND she’s not too good at it – but yes, something would be better than nothing. But she didn’t have “nothing” – she got some wire to use for snares, a knife from Clove & then she took the bow & arrows from Glimmer, so … no there was absolutely no need to make a crappy one.

The salute in the film is the EXACT one from the book…kiss the 3 middle fingers of the left hand, then extend into the air toward the person. The same one she does to the camera after Rue dies. Not sure what you were seeing that was different??

Regardless – the book IS better. But it’s also a GREAT film on its own.

Imp, had you not read this book then you might have been bored or confused with this film. It has a slow start, it leaves out some crucial elements that make this a more compelling story, and the effects were terrible (like watching something on the sci-fi network). Jennifer Lawrence was not the problem so don’t worry about me going there. The movie does not make the Capital out to be as cold and evil as the book. The movie fails to make Haymitch, maybe the coolest character, a distraught soul because of what the games past and present have done to him (instead he is just a sarcastic guy that has an occasional drink). I’m not looking for intense gore but the film does not show enough to make the game serious enough (I know it is PG-13 but they really wimped out with how intense some scenes were in the book). I thought the book was great but to say that the film was great on its own is ludicrous. Donald Sutherland is great but was poorly cast as Snow. The whole sponsor thing was poorly done. The CGI was very poor. The true feelings Katniss has towards Peeta are never really conveyed. Any of the scenes with Stanley Tucci were boring and forgettable. Almost every scene seemed to have dropped lines that could have made the story better (guess we’ll have plenty of extended scenes to watch on the DVD). Overall the director/writers/producers failed to make a great film because they assumed that most people have read the books and therefore can fill in the gaps. I’m glad I read the book first because I’m pretty sure I would have avoided it based on the movie. I’m sure the next film will be better (nowhere to go but up!).

I’m _thrilled_ that the muttations weren’t covered in depth. The last fight in the book freaked the hell out of me. That was the reason it took two weeks for me to see the movie: I didn’t want to see that horror show brought to life.

I mean the muttations in general – I’m glad they didn’t do the whole “dead tribute as mutt” thing too :) I think it was a bit of an oversight to not explain the significance of the Mockingjay as a potential symbol of rebellion. But I’m pretty positive they will in the film adaptation of Catching Fire…because if they don’t, some stuff is definitely not going to make sense to non-readers!

This article is wrong, First of all Haymitch does tell Katniss and Peeta about why some tributes team up, he always explains that people in higher districts go to special schools that teach kids how to win the Hunger games. Another thing is that even though in the movie they never mention that the people of Panem can’t leave their district. It is pretty given considering at the beginning of the movie Katniss is seen climbing under a fence that has a sign on it that says don’t pass this point. So it’s pretty given. And another thing: They do say one reason why Peeta joined the careers. They say that Peeta is the only way of finding Katniss so thats why they let him in the alliance.

I thought it was clear too, but my friend John Ordover (who has commented above) did not. The questions I answered are the ones he asked me over email. I thought if he had problems understanding some plot points, others would as well, hence the reason for the article.

Gina, Imp, please remember I only saw the movie – so I have to take the movie at face value. But here’s my real problem:

The movie goes to a lot of trouble to set up Katniss as highly skilled and competent, then does she not show one lick of competence in the Arena. She never saves herself or anyone on her own (Rue thought up dropping the wasps, she fails to protect Rue later on), never succeeds on her own (she is saved by the black guy who comes from nowhere) or floating things drop down and give her just what she needs. Plus she promises to win the game – not survive which is apparently what she says in the book, in the movie she says -win-, then doesn’t even -try- to knock off the others.

Our potential heroine is undercut at every turn. Compare her to any male action hero in a similar set-up. Male heroes solve their own problems – per The Hunger Games =movie=, female heroes can’t do anything on their own except threaten suicide.

Despite this, ladies of all ages see her as a new archetype of a female action hero, a result, I would argue, of projecting into the movie what they wish was there.